- 50 -
information also pertained to properties that were not comparable to
the subject property, and we do not know the length of time that the
RTC marketed the properties before selling them. Fourth, he assumed
incorrectly that an across-the-board discount could apply to each
parcel of the subject property. We discuss below why this assumption
is incorrect. Fifth, he assumed incorrectly that a market absorption
discount equals the difference between a property's appraised value
and its actual sale value. Although it is true that fair market
value for Federal tax purposes could in certain cases equal a
property's appraised value, this does not mean, as Mr. Shanker would
have us hold, that a market absorption discount applies to that
property to the extent that the property actually sells after the
valuation date for less than its appraised value. Sixth, he assumed
incorrectly that a market absorption discount applies when competing
properties, even if not comparable, are offered for sale in the same
geographical market, and the properties cannot sell within 6 months.
We discuss below why this assumption is incorrect, but note here that
even the estate acknowledges in its brief that properties compete
against each other only if similar. Seventh, he acknowledged that
there are individuals and organizations interested in investing large
sums of money in apartment complexes, yet he spoke to no brokers
about selling properties, or how they would go about selling the
properties. Nor did he perform any independent research on sales or
Page: Previous 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011